We've had some boring legislative elections in my time here, but this one takes the cake. I thought we would have a couple late entrants to create a lively race, but it now appears that won't happen. Therefore, we have six candidates vying for five seats. And with no disrespect to Remsol, who has been working hard for the good of the region, I think he's likely to be the odd man out.
People will understandably be unhappy about how this election season has unfolded. As a result, NES's legislative reform proposals are likely to fall on fertile ground. I'm not sure how I feel about that. On one hand, it does seem that NES has put his finger on a chronic, structural problem, and an election is an opportune time to wrestle with novel solutions to such problems. On the other hand, I'm not necessarily sold on NES's proposed solution.
I'm not exactly sure where I stand on the notion of radical reform, but I have a few preliminary thoughts on NES's specific proposals.
1. The Senate's problems aren't as bad as NES seems to think. It wasn't long ago that the Senate was immersed in the weighty task of rewriting the region's laws. That task took three terms to complete, and by all accounts, the final product was commendable. If this means there is little for the current Senate to do, then that means the Senate is a victim of its own success. That's an important insight.
2. The Citizens Assembly has been chronically ineffective. If the Senate is trapped by its past success, entrusting the future of our laws to the Citizens Assembly seems like a prescription to demolish that success, not to build on it. If we ultimately decide that radical reform is necessary, I would rather create new institutions than attempt to breathe life into the chronically troubled CA.
3. We shouldn't give the Senate a new job just to justify its continued existence. To be fair, this is not what NES is suggesting -- I'm sure he thinks that having the Senate serve as a council of elders would be good for the region. I disagree. There is a reason that we have concentrated power in the Executive branch over the years -- the Executive is, of necessity, the branch that gets things done, and the people who are in charge of getting things done ought to have the largest say in what gets done and how it gets done. If anything, old-timers like NES and me who no longer do the yeoman's work of government have too much say, not too little.
I hope this post isn't seen as a criticism of NES personally. He's a deeply committed citizen and will most certainly have my vote in tomorrow's election. And as I said above, I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea of radical reform. If we're going to go that route, however, there should be a range of proposals -- not just one man's ideas versus the status quo. If NES's ideas start that discussion, he will have done this region a great service.
Also, we should make sure the merits of the status quo are fully defended in any discussion of radical reform. Let's face it -- most regions would kill to have the "problems" we face. That doesn't mean we should stand pat, but neither should we disregard the role that our institutional underpinnings have played in our current strength.
Maybe it has been a boring election, but things aren't going to stay boring for long.
